Quote:
Originally Posted by Apoc
No, im not teaching, I know most of you, you especially, refuse to learn anything or admit that anyone else could teach you anything. Perhaps you even do know the difference between actual darwinism and the topic of this thread. Nothing irks me more than than someone using a term to describe something totally different than what that term actually means.
If they were called the 'Idiot awards' or 'Dumbfuck Awards', or the 'People who got what they deserved awards', i'd be all for it. But I hate the fact that the legacy left by a brilliant biologist are these so called 'Darwin Awards', when his research is some of the most important in our history and was the start of our research on genetics, yet instead everyone equates it with that shit.
|
Lizards with camoflauge colored skin lived longer (and were therefore more likely to mate & reproduce) than lizards who were born with "plain" color skin. Kinda the same thing as people who were lucky enough to be born with self-control and logical reasoning ability, passed down by their parents. Those who don't, are more likely to die sooner. So I don't see much of a problem with the Darwins Awards analogy.
OK maybe even the "best" people make mistakes or do stupid things when they're drunk or having fun, but one could make the argument that if they possessed superior breeding & genetics, they'd be less likely to do stupid shit. You can't argue with the fact that many mental/personality attributes are passed down by your parents.